Seduced by the siren call of the Sony NEX-5 camera

After hemming and hawing for about six months I finally took the plunge and bought a Sony NEX-5 interchangeable lens compact camera. As I wrote when the camera debuted, I was concerned about a few apparent drawbacks: a new lens mount and the lack of in-body image stabilization. You see, the reason I made the Sony a100 my first dSLR was entirely due to it being the only dSLR at the time–fall 2006–with in-body stabilization. It continues to be a feature I really like in my a100, even if now Pentax and Olympus have it, too.

Ultimately my concerns were minimized when I had a chance to actually have the NEX-5 in my hands and see just how small and pocketable it really is. Now, I had also been considering going with one of the competing micro-four-thirds (m4/3) cameras from Olympus or Panasonic, like the E-PL1 or GF-1, and only the Olympus has in-body stabilization. These cameras, too, have new lens mounts, though there are more lenses available since the first m4/3 camera debuted about fifteen months ago.

I finally decided to go with the NEX-5 for several reasons. First, Sony has released an adapter that permits it to use Alpha-mount dSLR lenses. With a firmware upgrade that came out in October, that adapter will autofocus most newer lenses. Also, the new firmware made significant improvements to the NEX-5′s user interface. Of particular importance to me is the addition of programmable buttons, to which you can assign your most used functions.

I was also convinced by the NEX-5 having full 1080 HD video rather than just 720. While 720 is certainly quite adequate for many applications, at this point I don’t see any reason not to go with 1080. Finally, one of the most appealing aspects of the m4/3 cameras is that there are adapters available to fit almost any camera lens out there, so you can use your Nikon, Canon or even Leica lenses. But then these sorts of adapters starting appearing for the NEX cameras, too.

I actually bought my NEX-5 at a brick-and-mortar store, Bel Air Camera in Westwood, Los Angeles, near the UCLA campus. They were offering it for the same price as everyone else (due to Sony’s pricing restrictions), and the salesman let me try it out with the new 18-200mm lens. He told me, “I don’t want to sell you that lens with that camera,” which was refreshingly honest. The reason why is because the lens is just way too big for the diminutive NEX-5, and I agreed. While it feels relatively well proportioned on a full-sized dSLR, on the NEX it really defeats the purpose of having such a compact camera.

On top of the NEX’s unique features as a compact interchangeable lens camera, I also was impressed by how much better its low-light, high-ISO performance is compared to my four-year-old a100. It’s really night and day, with the NEX rivaling the well-regarded low-light performance of the Nikon D300, which I use at work. Since I hate to use flash and like to take photos in light-challenged settings like rock clubs, I was really looking forward to getting the bump in low-light performance with the NEX.

I’ve had the camera now for just over two weeks and I’m just starting to get a feel for it. Lacking a viewfinder you compose your shot on the rear LCD, just like a point-and-shoot digicam. I don’t mind this aspect, though it does take some getting used to. The autofocus isn’t quite as fast as a dSLR, but it’s actually quieter and a little more certain than my a100, which was never known for its autofocus performance. When you want to manually focus you can magnify the center of the image on the LCD, which greatly helps nail it. In fact, I’m finding it easier to focus manually with the NEX-5 than with my dSLR. Neither is as easy to focus as my old manual film SLRs which have a split-prism viewfinder that lets you see precisely when you have focus, but those focusing screens aren’t included in any modern SLRs anymore.

At first I was actually kind of disappointed with the accuracy of the autofocus, finding my pictures not quite as sharp as I’d like. Part of this I attribute to the two lenses introduced with the camera, but then I found my few manually-focused pictures came out sharper. I realized the camera came set to multipoint autofocus which seems like it averages out the focus distance between a few different points in the scene. I prefer to just have one autofocus point in the center so I know exactly where the focus will fall. I’ve since changed the setting but haven’t had a chance to go out and really test the change.

I can say that I’m very happy with the low-light performance. It truly blows away my old a100, giving me pretty clean images up to ISO 1600, and very useable images up to ISO 6400. At these higher ISOs there is noise, but it’s quite film-like and not at all unpleasing, especially given the fact that you can essentially take pictures lit by streetlight.

I did buy a Nikon lens adapter made by Fotodiox, located just north of Chicago in Waukegan, IL. With an adapter you have no autofocus, which is fine with me. You also have to set the aperture manually on the lens, but the camera still meters fine. The adapter I bought even lets you use newer G-series Nikon lenses that don’t have an aperture ring. In order to control aperture you use a little dial which opens and closes it. It doesn’t give you a precise reading, but you can see the results right on the LCD, which eliminates a lot of the guesswork. With daylight receding much earlier now I haven’t had much opportunity to take the NEX-5 out with some Nikon glass, but preliminary testing inside the house looks promising.

I’ve only shot a tiny bit of video that was worth anything, but still not with a tripod, which is really necessary if you’re going to get a steady image using such a tiny camera. The aforementioned firmware update now permits you to set the camera’s aperture manually, but only before starting to record. Frankly, that’s fine since you really shouldn’t need to change aperture while recording unless you’re doing long-form event or lecture recording. Even then, the NEX-5 really isn’t the proper tool for that job. Rather, the NEX-5 is well suited to cinema style single-camera shooting with short takes, just like all other video dSLRs.

Here’s a short 2 minute video I shot along Lake Michigan last week during an unseasonably warm spell last week. If you go to YouTube you can view it in full 1080 HD.

No, there is no microphone input on the NEX-5, but its m4/3 competitors don’t have inputs either, at least not without an adapter. While I have been strong advocate of mic inputs on camcorder I ultimately decided that it wouldn’t be a big deal for me. This is because I’m quite comfortable using a separate digital audio recorder to capture audio, just like you would when shooting film. Plus, the digital audio recorder arguably will capture higher quality sound, with more precise level controls. The NEX-5 and my Zoom H2 audio recorder together take up less space in a bag than my miniDV camcorder, so this is not the inconvenience it was several years ago.

I was pleasantly surprised to find that Final Cut Express and Pro imported my video footage without any hiccups. After importing it was immediately available in the timeline for editing. I’ve only imported about ten minutes of footage so far, so I don’t know what it will be like to work with an hour or more. But so far it’s been refreshingly easy.

I will definitely need more time to get more acquainted with the NEX-5 both as a still and video camera, but so far I’m quite happy. And I’m especially satisfied with its size and the ability to slip it into a coat pocket or a small bag where taking along a dSLR would be unwieldy. I’m also interested in using it in a two-camera setup with my Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10 palm-sized camcorder. While the Xacti doesn’t have nearly the same image quality, in good light its 720p HD video is high quality. Furthermore, the Xacti is even smaller and much cheaper, so I’ll be willing to put it places where I wouldn’t want to risk my NEX-5.

Stay tuned to mediageek for more updates about my experience with the NEX-5.

Zoom finally adds HD video to a portable audio recorder, but still no mic input

I’m always complaining about how most consumer-level camcorders don’t feature microphone inputs, or even decent mics. My Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10 has pretty good mics for camcorder of it’s size and price. But because the mics are on the camera and there’s no input to add an external mic, they’re still inappropriate for interviews or any sort of shoot where you need to record voices clearly because the mics will be too far away.

I’m a big fan of Zoom’s portable digital audio recorders — I’ve been using the small Zoom H2 for a couple of years now. Last year Zoom released their Q3 “handy video recorder” which added a standard-definition camcorder to a high-quality stereo audio recorder. Strangely, the Q3 lacks a microphone input, although its mics outclass anything on a camcorder.

Now Zoom has upped the ante by adding HD to create the Q3HD, featuring full 1080p HD video. I’m surprised that the Q3HD still lacks a microphone input, however it does add a line input. In its promotional literature Zoom says that the input is good for recording multiple microphones using a mixer “for sophisticated recordings.” While this is certainly useful, I question whether someone using a tiny hand-held camcorder wants to drag around a mixer and multiple mics just to get better sound. Being able to just plug in a single lavaliere mic would be much more practical.

Like most Flip-style camcorders the Q3HD has no optical zoom, and doesn’t seem to have much in the way of manual control over the video. So, in essence it’s a Flip camcorder with vastly improved audio. I think it would be vastly more useful if Zoom were to combine something like a Sanyo Xacti style camcorder, that has an optical zoom, with the enhanced audio recording of their “handy recorders.” That would really make for a DIY videographer’s dream pocket camcorder.

The Q3HD is supposed to be available by the end of the year for $299. My guess is that the street price will be a good bit lower than that. However, I’d gladly pay $300 or a bit more for my dream of an Xacti + Q3HD.

Considering video/still convergence and Sony’s NEX-VG10 interchangeable lens camcorder

Back in May I wrote about the vexing mix of features in Sony’s new NEX interchangeable lens digital cameras. While visiting a big Chicagoland electronics megastore I finally got my hands on the NEX-3 and NEX-5 cameras and came away liking them more than I expected. Though I only got to play with them for a few minutes I didn’t find the user interface to be as frustrating as I predicted. I rarely shoot in full manual mode, generally preferring aperture- or shutter-priority. So changing aperture or shutter using the back control dial was fairly intuitive and easy.

I was truly blown away by the form-factor. These are tiny cameras! Without the lens they’re the size of a typical compact point-and-shoot. With the lens they’re no bigger than so-called “bridge” cameras of the sort that look like mini-SLRs. The fit and finish is very nice, and the lens casing feels top-notch. Some of my initial concerns still remain, especially the lack of true manual exposure control when shooting video along with the lack of a microphone input for video. Nevertheless, I came away more intrigued than before when I’d only read about them.

Answering some of the concerns about the video capabilities of the NEX-3/5 Sony is releasing a camcorder using the same large APS-C sized image sensor and interchangeable lens mount, named the NEX-VG10. The Luminous Landscape just published a hands-on review of the camcorder, giving it a qualified recommendation. It seems like most of the weaknesses of the camera lie in firmware — that is, features that are programmed in rather than part of the physical mechanics of the camera. In particular, there’s limited exposure monitoring making it difficult to see when you’re clipping the highlights. I find that omission particularly surprising, since it’s included in nearly every pro-sumer Sony camcorder I’ve used in the last decade.

The idea of having a still camera and a camcorder that can share lenses is quite exciting, as is having a true video camcorder–not just a still dSLR with video capabilities tacked on–sporting a large high-quality sensor that’s nearly the size of 35mm motion picture film. All the more amazing is that the still camera costs well less than a grand and the camcorder costs just under $200 with lens. This approach promises to be a game-changer in many of the ways that video dSLRs shook up the digital video world.

Panasonic has also announced its own version of an interchangeable lens camcorder based on still-camera sensor, the AG-AF100. Panasonic’s version is based around the micro 4/3 standard behind still cameras like the Olympus Pen series and the Panasonic GH-1. The AF100 is still a little further away from stores, and looks to be a bit more pro oriented than the Sony, with the inclusion of XLR mic jacks and more exposure options. It also looks to be more expensive, at a price around $6000.

I find the Sony cameras to be so interesting because of their price, and because I’m already an owner of a Sony dSLR. While Sony dSLR lenses don’t mount directly on the new cameras and camcorders, there is adapter that lets you use them.

I’m not quite ready to jump into a new camera, camcorder or lens-mount system, but am seriously considering taking the plunge with the NEX-5 or its successor. To add more grist to the mill, dSLR News Shooter has a short review of the NEX-5 as a video camera for the working journalist.

In any event, I will be keeping close watch to see what develops. Exciting times, indeed.

The best camcorder is the one you have with you

There’s a common idea amongst serious photographers that it’s a good idea to always have a camera on you, because you never know when you’ll see the stuff of a great picture. Seeing as how it’s often impractical to always have an SLR or other larger camera with you, many photogs adopted smaller point-and-shoot cameras they could easily toss into a bag or even keep in a pocket. In the digital age these are often called “serious compacts,” because they offer enough control for the experienced photographer without being enormous.

In fact, many photographers over the years have argued that the moment a great photo happens is far more important than the gear you use to shoot it. That’s why many will contend that your camera doesn’t matter or that the best camera is the one you have with you.

While these ideas seem to be quite common in still photography I don’t often hear them repeated in video circles. It could be that photos and video often are thought of differently, or perhaps serious videographers look upon video shot in the moment to be too much like bad home videos to be taken seriously. Or maybe it’s because it’s a very recent occurrence that there are video cameras that are as small as compact still cameras.

Home video camcorders are about thirty years old now, but for the first ten years of their existence they were big shoulder-mounted affairs. In the 1990s the birth of 8mm, VHS-C and then miniDV led to so-called “palmcorders.” Yet, they were still a little bigger than most film SLR cameras. That is to say, one might take it on vacation to record special moments, but only a dedicated few would take one on a walk through the park or to a party.

In the early 2000s there were several miniDV camcorders shrunk down to about the size of a couple of paperback books. While this seems to have encouraged more folks to carry camcorders with them, the relative delicacy of their complex tape mechanisms and the need to carry blank tapes still served as discouragement from keeping one in your bag all the time.

By 2005 the ability to record video crept into most point-and-shoot digital cameras. At this point I think a lot of average folks started to take more video, primarily because it was simple and built into the camera they were hauling around anyway. But the quality of the video still was lacking compared to a decent dedicated camcorder, often with much poorer sound. So while many more videographers played around with their digicam’s video function, it doesn’t seem like they were taken too seriously.

Now we’re finally at the point where there are good camcorders that will fit in your pocket. Whether it’s a Flip cam, a Sanyo Xacti like I use, a point-and-shoot digital camera with HD video or even an iPhone 4 it’s possible to shoot quite credible video using a device only slightly bigger than a miniDV videocassette. Thus begins the era wherein serious videographers can indulge in taking “video notes” of daily life and events in the way still photographers have been doing for decades.

I’ve realized that’s the real value to small camcorders, having the ability to easily shoot video without a lot of planning and schlepping. As a result I think I’ve shot more video with my Xacti VPC-CG10 in the last year than I shot with my miniDV camcorders over the previous nine years. The miniDV camcorders, as relatively small and easy to use as they were, still required more forethought and planning, along with carrying an extra bag for the camera and tapes.

What I’ve really enjoyed is shooting short “slice-of-life” videos that last no more than a few minutes once edited down. Not coincidentally, this is the perfect length to share on the web. So I also think that having the ability now to share HD quality video so easily on the web contributes to the value of the pocket-sized camcorder, where before the venues to share such video widely were quite a bit more limited.

I’ve got quite a bit of video in the queue waiting to be edited. Luckily, sometimes I end up with a solid 3 minutes that requires minimal editing. As an aside, while I still lament the lack of a proper microphone input jack in most small camcorders, I continue to be amazed at the quality of the sound recording in my Xacti VPC-CG10. It truly rivals the quality of dedicated digital audio recorders like the Zoom H2. The Xacti doesn’t quite measure up at the low-end, and emphasizes the midrange a little more than I’d like. But a little equalization cleans that up pretty easily. I now notice that the new Sanyo VPC-PD2 that I wrote about yesterday sports some fairly serious looking microphones that I am curious to hear.

Here’s a short video I shot of the classic post-punk band Mission of Burma at the Wicker Park Fest street fair here in Chicago a couple of weeks ago. This was shot hand-held from the crowd in the street. There was no room for a tripod or monopod. The only reason I was able to grab the video was because I had the camera in my bag and could easily grab it. I’m able to hold the Xacti much more still than a Flip style camcorder because of it’s pistol-grip design and flip out screen which makes for a more stable two-handed grip.

The sun was starting to go down so I switched the CG10 into black and white mode which I think works better in low light. I accidentally underexposed it a little, as I’ve learned that the LCD screen isn’t the most accurate way to judge exposure, so I had to boost the gamma in post. This makes the video a little more contrasty in a way that I like and is more film-like, but it may not be everyone’s cup of tea.

Interesting new Sanyo flip-style camcorder

Sanyo just announced a new Xacti camcorder that looks interesting due to the way it breaks from the company’s typical pistol-grip style camcorders and due to its lens. The VPC-PD2BK has a form-factor more like the Flip-style cams, but with a 3x zoom lens that looks like it came from a compact still digicam, therefore also featuring a faster maximum aperture of f/3.1 than on their pistol-grip style cams which usually start at f/3.5. Every little extra bit of light gathering helps.

As I’ve noted before, while I really like my Xacti VPC-GG10, I find that it’s lens is not up to the standard of the average digicam. In everyday use this matters less for video than for still pictures. But this better looking lens on the new PD2 gives me some hope that perhaps this cam will deliver better stills alongside full 1080p HD video (alas, only at 30 fps, rather than the cinema standard of 24p).

The PD2 also doesn’t include a mic jack or optical image stabilization–two features which would be very welcome. But at a pre-order price of $169 over at Amazon, if the quality matches or betters the VPC-CG10 (which is what I’d hope), the PD2 may still be a very appealing option for videographers looking for more flexible image control than available with the typical Flip-style cam.

Hey Sanyo, if you’re reading, how about sending me one for review? I promise to send it back ;->,

Putting the Xacti VPC-CG10 camcorder to work DIY style

As I’ve blogged before, I’m having a blast using my Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10 palm-sized HD camcorder. I’m starting to hear about other videographers who appreciate the CG10 not just for its cost, size and HD, but also for its manual control over exposure and focus.

I just read a quick post at the Frugal Filmmaker about writer and actor Curtis Hendley using some great DIY lighting techniques to shoot video on his CG10. Frugal Filmmaker Scott Eggleston even points out the CG10′s manual controls. Also, make sure to take note of the fact that the CG10 in the photo is on a tripod, which is the best way to make sure your video comes out better and more polished.

I’m actually working on a blog post discussing how to put the Xacti camcorders’ manual controls to good use in just about any setting, and how that will make your video look just that much better than anything that comes from a Flip-style camcorder, or even a shiny new iPhone 4.

What video camera should I buy?

One of the most common questions I hear from educators looking to start producing video is one that I suspect a lot of readers have heard: “What camera should I buy?” On the surface it’s quite an innocuous query, seemingly simple to answer. Yet, bundled up in there is a very common and pernicious assumption, that the key to good video is all about the equipment you use.

Read the rest at OnlineVideo.net…

Sony teases me with their new, but frustrating NEX digital cameras

Digital photography turned me into a photography enthusiast. Although I’ve been shooting video ever since I first got my hands on a black-and-white 1/2″ reel-to-reel VTR as a kid, for some reason still photography never interested me much in high school or college. But in 2001 when I got my first miniDV camcorder which also had a still image recording I awoke to the allure of photography.

Like a lot of people, I started with a very simple point-and-shoot digicam–a Fuji sporting a full 1.3 megapixels–before eventually getting a digital SLR in 2006. Instead of going with a Nikon or Canon, I decided to take a chance on Sony’s very first dSLR introduced after acquiring Konica-Minolta’s camera division, the a100. Although I had a few Nikon lenses to go with some old film SLRs, I didn’t think my investment in glass was substantial enough to make a Nikon dSLR necessary.

I chose the Sony a100 primarily for one big reason: in-body image stabilization. Nowadays Olympus and Pentax offer this feature, too, but in Oct. 2006 the a100 was the only a100 that had it. With a Nikon or Canon dSLR you can buy lenses that have image stabilization, but they’re more expensive than non-stabilized ones. With the a100–and now, any Sony dSLR–every lens you mount on it is stabilized. What this means is that you can take pictures with longer shutter speeds, such as in low light, minimizing the effect of camera shake, making for sharper pictures.

I can find things to quibble about in the a100, but I’ve been quite happy using it for the last three and a half years. No gadget is ever perfect, and a good photographer learns his way around his camera. I’m quite familiar with its operation and quirks, and satisfied with the images I obtain. I don’t use this camera professionally, but I’ve built up a small collection of nice lenses. Aside from the fact that newer models offer lower noise at high ISOs in lower light, and have higher resolution, I’m not particularly tempted to trade in my old a100 yet.

However, I have been quite tempted by the new compact mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras in the micro-four/thirds mount like the Olympus Pen series and the Panasonic GF-1. They offer image quality on par with dSLRs in bodies closer to the size of larger point-and-shoot cameras. I’m tempted because I like having a compact digital camera, but have been generally disappointed with their image quality. They tend to be fine for casual shots in daylight, but suffer quite a bit in anything dimmer. Furthermore, as I’ve become a more experienced photographer I like to use manual controls and these are often missing or very limited on digital point-and-shoots.

Then at this year’s Consumer Electronics Show Sony previewed a new line of interchangeable lens compact cameras to add to its Alpha line. I’ve been cautiously excited as various details were rumored and leaked. Today the real cameras were announced, and I’m a little disappointed.

Aesthetically the two new cameras, named the NEX 3 and NEX 5, look very cool, with styling that doesn’t quite look like any other camera out there. The camera body itself is very thin and compact, with the higher-end NEX 5 constructed from sturdy magnesium. They also have dSLR-sized (APS-C) sensors sporting 14 megapixels, which are bigger than both high-end point-and-shoots like the Canon G11 and Olympus and Panasonic micro-4/3 cameras. Finally, also in the plus column, they both shoot full 1080i HD video, where the other cams top out at 720.

Unfortunately, there are two big minuses that dump some cold water on my enthusiasm. The biggest drawback is that they don’t have in-body image stabilization. Given that this was why I chose a Sony dSLR in the first place, this is a big disappointment. By comparison, all the Olympus Pen cameras have in-body IS, although the Panasonics do not. I understand that the NEXs lack IS so Sony could make the camera bodies thinnner. But, I, for one, would gladly take a slightly thicker camera in exchange for the IS.

To be fair, Sony plans to offer lenses with IS to fit the NEX cameras, just like Panasonic does for its micro-4/3 cameras. However, Sony isn’t putting IS in all their lenses, and the first two being offered don’t have it.

The second minus is that the cameras use a new lens mount, meaning Sony’s A-mount dSLR lenses don’t work without an adapter. Now, I was expecting this possibility, since micro-4/3 was a new mount requiring an adapter to use older Olympus and Panasonic dSLR lenses. So by itself, this isn’t a huge deal. But the adapter won’t support autofocus using the Sony dSLR lenses. To me, this significantly undercuts what could be a big advantage of choosing a Sony NEX camera–the ability to leverage my existing Alpha lenses.

Because of the unique design advantages of these mirrorless interchangeable compacts, a thriving aftermarket in lens adapters has sprung up. Now you can get adapters for an Olympus Pen or Panasonic GF-1 what will allow you to use just about any 35mm lens in existence. The caveat with these adapters is that they also don’t support autofocus.

But I can actually get a Sony lens adapter for an Olympus E-PL1, which has in-body image stabilization, my most coveted feature. Given that, why would I buy a Sony NEX 3 or 5 which offers no better Alpha lens compatibility and lacks image stabilization?

That said, the NEXs aren’t in stores yet and I haven’t had my hands on them. The preliminary hands-on previews and reviews I’ve ready are generally positive. There’s mostly praise for the cameras’ size and the handling, along with good reports on image quality. Based on some image samples I’ve seen, four years of sensor advancement give much better low-light ability than my a100 in a body much closer in size to a point-and-shoot.

At the moment I’m quite undecided as to whether I want to take the plunge with an NEX or a competitor like an Olympus Pen. With a few rare exceptions, with tech gadgets you rarely lose by waiting to see what lies around the bend. Sony might introduce follow-up models with in-body IS (though I kind of doubt it) or that can autofocus Alpha-mount lenses (somewhat more likely). Or Olympus might offer up something even more tempting that makes me forget the NEX’s 1080i HD video and better high-ISO performance.

So that means I’m going to wait and see, saving my hard-earned dollars for the moment. It’s fun just watching and having something to look forward to.

From miniDV to dSLR – Contemplating the New Era of Digital Video

When I saw the first miniDV digital camcorders in the late 1990s I was blown away by the edit-ready broadcast-quality picture they captured on tapes half the size of an 8mm videocassette and on cameras smaller than ever seen before. Yet, I couldn’t predict that only about a decade later we’d see the ability to shoot high-definition on tapeless cameras, with the ability to nearly instantaneously upload that video to the internet. In the previous ten years (roughly 1989 – 1999) we saw the evolution of the consumer camcorder from bulky shoulder-mount VHS and Beta cams to smaller, compact 8mm and Hi-8 camcorders. With Hi-8 we finally saw near-broadcast-quality video in compact cameras costing a few thousand dollars, rather than tens of thousands. That was certainly a leap, but still not as huge as what we’ve seen in the first decade of the 21st century.

The ground-breaking quality and adapatibility of DV and miniDV camcorders caused many independently-minded filmmakers to use the format to shoot films that would probably have been too expensive to undertake using film. Indie films like Mike Figgis’ Timecode, Jennifer Jason Leigh’s The Anniversary Party and Richard Linklater’s Tape come to mind. All were more experimental, in some specific regard, than even most independent films of the time. And all used the small form-factor of DV camcorders, along with the low-cost of shooting multiple cameras, to do things that maximized the utility of these features.

This reminiscence is sparked because this past week I had the opportunity to try out a colleague’s new HD video capable digital SLR, the new Canon Rebel T2i. The low cost and new HD quality threshold now transcended by video dSLRs are catalyzing a similar new wave of indie film and video innovation. So I was glad to finally have the opportunity to lay my hands on a video dSLR and put it through its paces, accompanied by my talented colleagues.

We tested it out in a studio with some studio lighting, using just a kit lens, to see how it would fare compared to HD video cameras that we use everyday, like the Panasonic HVX-200. The results were very impressive, arguably besting what I’ve seen with the current generation of prosumer HD camcorders used by educational and event videographers and indie filmmakers.
Read more »

What I’ve Been Up To Elsewhere

It looks like my challenge for 2010 is to see how many simultaneous writing projects I can keep up. What I’m learning so far is that the projects involving other people seem to gain my attention better than my nine-year-old blog here. Also, I enrolled in distance education certificate program that is also soaking up quite a few hours a week.

However, if you’re interested here’s some of the things I’ve written recently elsewhere.

At Radio Survivor I’ve discussed two of my favorite commercial radio stations, WDHA and WXRT. Yes, despite my undying loyalty to college, community and public radio, there have been a few commercial stations that rise above and make it into my radios once in a while.

Of particular interest to the typical mediageek reader should be my report on the fifty-nine new noncommerical radio licenses the FCC recently issued. Interestingly, five of these licenses went to current low-power FM stations.

I’ve stepped up my output for Streaming Media Magazine and StreamingMedia.com, trying to cover more stories related to video in education. My new biweekly series is called Video.edu. The first first edition I covered UCLA pulling streaming videos after receiving a legal threat and changes to educational technology funding in Obama’s 2011 budget. In the second one I wrote about the library copyright alliance defending educational streaming of copyrighted video and a Yale admissions video that’s gone viral.

My two most recent magazine columns are a 2009 year-in-review of video in education and a rumination on where is the teaching video camera of today.